I don't really have a step-by-step procedure to reproduce this. I'm pretty sure that a few hours after logging into a gnome session, some apps start crashing with this error, consistently.
I'd be happy to help debug. Is there some policykit backend that I should monitor? Any locks that might be stuck? Maybe I'll just snapshot /var/lib/PolicyKit* before and after the problem and attach them if they don't contain any personal info.

This is happening on my f9 x86_64 box that I upgraded from fc6 x86_64 too.
Again, I can't run various things that use PolicyKit, including gnome-system-monitor, polkit-gnome-example and gpk-update-icon.
A few lines from an strace of polikit-gnome-example that also occur when the other apps are run:
inotify_init() = 6
inotify_add_watch(6, "/etc/PolicyKit/PolicyKit.conf", IN_MODIFY|IN_ATTRIB|IN_CREATE) = -1 ENOSPC (No space left on device)
write(2, "[WARN 20006] polkit-error.c:143:"..., 80[WARN 20006] polkit-error.c:143:polkit_error_get_error_message(): error != NULL
) = 80
write(2, " Not built with -rdynamic so una"..., 57 Not built with -rdynamic so unable to print a backtrace
) = 57
write(2, "\n** (polkit-gnome-example:20006)"..., 93
** (polkit-gnome-example:20006): WARNING **: Failed to initialize PolicyKit context: (null)
(and, no, my disc _isn't_ full)

Oh, and why is this severity "low"? An important part of the system stops working and the only way is to fix it is to log out of your whole desktop session?
Where "low" is meant to be:
Problem is minor loss of function, or other problem where easy workaround is present.
Not severity "low" in my mind.

(In reply to comment #8)
> Oh, and why is this severity "low"?
Because it's low priority for me, at the moment.
Does this happen on a fresh install, or just from upgrades? What is the difference in packages installed from an F8->F9 upgrade and a fresh F9 install?
Richard.

On my upgraded an fully updated system:
# rpm -qa|grep -i policy
PolicyKit-gnome-0.8-4.fc9.x86_64
PolicyKit-gnome-libs-0.8-4.fc9.x86_64
PolicyKit-gnome-demo-0.8-4.fc9.x86_64
selinux-policy-3.3.1-95.fc9.noarch
PolicyKit-0.8-3.fc9.x86_64
selinux-policy-targeted-3.3.1-95.fc9.noarch
policycoreutils-2.0.52-8.fc9.x86_64
checkpolicy-2.0.16-3.fc9.x86_64
# rpm -qa|grep -i dbus
ndesk-dbus-glib-0.4.1-3.fc9.x86_64
dbus-glib-devel-0.74-8.fc9.x86_64
dbus-debuginfo-1.2.1-1.fc9.x86_64
dbus-libs-1.2.4-1.fc9.x86_64
dbus-glib-0.74-8.fc9.i386
dbus-1.2.4-1.fc9.x86_64
dbus-devel-1.2.4-1.fc9.x86_64
dbus-glib-debuginfo-0.74-8.fc9.x86_64
dbus-libs-1.2.4-1.fc9.i386
dbus-sharp-0.63-9.fc9.x86_64
dbus-glib-0.74-8.fc9.x86_64
dbus-python-0.83.0-2.fc9.x86_64
dbus-x11-1.2.4-1.fc9.x86_64
dbus-qt-0.70-4.fc9.x86_64
ndesk-dbus-0.6.1a-2.fc9.x86_64
I was about to paste a list of packages on a clean install that had been fully updated, but I tried to get such a system up to date, and got to a point where gpk-update-icon stopped working in a different way, namely:
process 3394: arguments to dbus_message_new_method_call() were incorrect, assertion "_dbus_check_is_valid_path (path)" failed in file dbus-message.c line 1074. This is normally a bug in some application using the D-Bus library.
D-Bus not built with -rdynamic so unable to print a backtrace
At this point:
# rpm -qa |grep -i policy
PolicyKit-0.8-2.fc9.x86_64
checkpolicy-2.0.14-1.fc9.x86_64
policycoreutils-2.0.46-5.fc9.x86_64
selinux-policy-targeted-3.3.1-42.fc9.noarch
PolicyKit-gnome-libs-0.8-4.fc9.x86_64
PolicyKit-gnome-0.8-4.fc9.x86_64
policycoreutils-gui-2.0.46-5.fc9.x86_64
selinux-policy-3.3.1-42.fc9.noarch
# rpm -qa |grep -i dbus
dbus-libs-1.2.1-1.fc9.x86_64
dbus-1.2.1-1.fc9.x86_64
dbus-x11-1.2.1-1.fc9.x86_64
ndesk-dbus-glib-0.4.1-3.fc9.x86_64
dbus-glib-0.74-6.fc9.x86_64
dbus-python-0.82.4-2.fc9.x86_64
dbus-qt-0.70-4.fc9.x86_64
ndesk-dbus-0.6.1a-2.fc9.x86_64
After a 'yum upgrade' :
# rpm -qa|grep -i policy
PolicyKit-0.8-3.fc9.x86_64
checkpolicy-2.0.16-3.fc9.x86_64
PolicyKit-gnome-0.8-4.fc9.x86_64
selinux-policy-targeted-3.3.1-95.fc9.noarch
selinux-policy-3.3.1-95.fc9.noarch
selinux-policy-devel-3.3.1-95.fc9.noarch
policycoreutils-gui-2.0.52-8.fc9.x86_64
PolicyKit-gnome-libs-0.8-4.fc9.x86_64
policycoreutils-2.0.52-8.fc9.x86_64
# rpm -qa|grep -i dbus
dbus-x11-1.2.4-1.fc9.x86_64
dbus-glib-0.74-8.fc9.x86_64
dbus-qt-0.70-4.fc9.x86_64
ndesk-dbus-0.6.1a-2.fc9.x86_64
dbus-1.2.4-1.fc9.x86_64
dbus-python-0.83.0-2.fc9.x86_64
ndesk-dbus-glib-0.4.1-3.fc9.x86_64
dbus-libs-1.2.4-1.fc9.x86_64
Note, the clean installation is only a test system, I've not used it enough to say whether or not this problem will occur or not.
I can provide the complete 'rpm -qa' for either of these systems if required.

For me, this happened on two x86_64 boxes. Both of them were upgraded via yum from F8 to F9 conform http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/YumUpgradeFaq
current package versions:
- PolicyKit-0.8-3.fc9.x86_64
- PolicyKit-gnome-0.8-4.fc9.x86_64
N.B. I no longer have the i386 version of PolicyKit installed. I also no longer manage to reproduce the problem. I ran the following command to clean up my installed packages:
# package-cleanup --cleandupes
Can you guys check if this works for you too?

(In reply to comment #12)
[snip]
> N.B. I no longer have the i386 version of PolicyKit installed. I also no longer
> manage to reproduce the problem. I ran the following command to clean up my
> installed packages:
>
> # package-cleanup --cleandupes
>
> Can you guys check if this works for you too?
# package-cleanup --cleandupes
Setting up yum
No dupes to clean

Created attachment 322987[details]
typescript of gdb session, attempting to run gpk-update-viewer
I have this same problem with rawhide (f10) -- attached is typescript from script(1) showing multiple segfaults w/their backtraces...
I first noticed this problem when I could not spawn the update viewer from the update applet.
If it matters, this is a gnome desktop, using compiz (spawned with compiz-manager --replace) and emerald (emerald --replace).

I can confirm that this is still a problem. system-manager, certain packagekit apps, stop working after a while. I have beagle installed as well.
I have a number of crash (bug-)reports lying around if it could help.

This has just started happening on me the past few days. I'm running an F9->F10 x86_64 system. I do not see this yet on my i386 system. I've been running on F10 on both i386 and x86_64 since it was released. I cannot start gnome-system-monitor or the PackageKit updater after my desktop session has been running for an unknown amount of time. If I log out and back in they start working again.
I did just install beagle a few weeks ago. I wonder if all the people with this bug are using beagle? I did it on both arches though and only x86_64 is showing symptoms at this time.

This message is a reminder that Fedora 9 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 9. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora
'version' of '9'.
Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version'
to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 9's end of life.
Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that
we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 9 is end of life. If you
would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it
against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this
bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version,
please add a comment here and someone will do it for you.
Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes
bugs or makes them obsolete.
The process we are following is described here:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping

Fedora 9 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-07-10. Fedora 9 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.
If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version.
Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.

Note

You need to
log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.